PDA

View Full Version : Who Said Nadal Sucked


dannyjjang
07-01-2006, 10:31 AM
Is It You?

guedoguedo
07-01-2006, 10:53 AM
stupid thread

malakas
07-01-2006, 10:54 AM
Who's asking?

dh003i
07-01-2006, 11:25 AM
Is It You?

Yes, Nadal does suck on grass. Fine, he beat an at-the-end of his career Agassi. A healthy Agassi would have cleaned his clock.

Let's see how he fares against Roddick and some other high-calibre healthy grass-court players.

dannyjjang
07-01-2006, 11:37 AM
lets start a discussion about his "hang time" in every serve...
Even Mcenroe said "Even players are talking about Nadals serve time"(not a exact quote, somewhat like that)

Andres rdy stdy, and Nadal bounces the ball 5 more times..before his serve.

Count Grishnackh
07-01-2006, 11:49 AM
Yes, Nadal does suck on grass. Fine, he beat an at-the-end of his career Agassi. A healthy Agassi would have cleaned his clock.

Let's see how he fares against Roddick and some other high-calibre healthy grass-court players.

Roddick is high quality? He's about to lose to Murray today. Angry Fed fans. YOu better watch out guys, he's coming for your boy and on grass. He's ready to win here. You just watch out.

Say Chi Sin Lo
07-01-2006, 11:53 AM
lets start a discussion about his "hang time" in every serve...
Even Mcenroe said "Even players are talking about Nadals serve time"(not a exact quote, somewhat like that)

Andres rdy stdy, and Nadal bounces the ball 5 more times..before his serve.

yeah i'll go nuts if my opponent takes that long, seriously... this isnt baseball where it takes 20-40seconds for each pitch

FedererUberAlles
07-01-2006, 12:37 PM
Sucked what?

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
07-01-2006, 12:39 PM
Nadal doesn't suck on grass, he's just mediocre on grass. He was lucky with his draw, Roddick now is also out.:cry:

yo_3133
07-01-2006, 12:55 PM
Roddick is high quality? He's about to lose to Murray today. Angry Fed fans. YOu better watch out guys, he's coming for your boy and on grass. He's ready to win here. You just watch out.
i'm a fed fan and fed's winninhg his 4th wimby. i'm so so soooooooooooooooo angry.....................................

Swissv2
07-01-2006, 01:11 PM
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR *yip* :mrgreen:

127mph
07-01-2006, 01:31 PM
nadal played big banger tennis today. but i still have doubts, because if he plays some one who comes into net, he will have a inconvinence

foetz
07-01-2006, 01:44 PM
nadal sux on every fast surface but since they're making the courts slower and slower over the years guys like him will get more successful on fast courts as well :(

dh003i
07-01-2006, 03:28 PM
Hey, I hope Nadal gets very lucky and does get to the final, so Federer could crush him. It would probably be 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.

But being realistic, there are a ton of grass-court players much better than Nadal.

VamosRafa
07-01-2006, 03:30 PM
Hey, I hope Nadal gets very lucky and does get to the final, so Federer could crush him. It would probably be 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.

But being realistic, there are a ton of grass-court players much better than Nadal.

And they are, who exactly???

Federer we know.

Who else?

LowProfile
07-01-2006, 03:34 PM
And they are, who exactly???

Federer we know.

Who else?

Nalbandian for one. Seb Grosjean. Max Miryni. Tomas Berdych. Mario Ancic. Novak Djokovic. Andy Murray. Dmitry Tursunov. Mardy Fish. And so on.

Bascially anyone who would beat Robert Kendrick in less than five sets. Hey that may actually be a lot of people, considering that Kendrick is ranked in the 200s. Looks like you need to brush up on your grass court player trivia.

VamosRafa
07-01-2006, 03:38 PM
Nalbandian for one. Seb Grosjean. Max Miryni. Tomas Berdych. Mario Ancic. Novak Djokovic. Andy Murray. Dmitry Tursunov. Mardy Fish. And so on.

Bascially anyone who would beat Robert Kendrick in less than five sets. Hey that may actually be a lot of people, considering that Kendrick is ranked in the 200s. Looks like you need to brush up on your grass court player trivia.

Okay, Nalby and Grosjean are out. Rafa has beaten Ancic on grass before (Wimbly 2004). He's 3-0 against Grosjean anyway. Have to check on Mirnyi, as I don't know that off the top of my head.

Berdych has beaten him on hardcourts once, but Rafa has beaten him on clay. But still, he'll have to get by Federer before he has another chance at Nadal here.

Rafa handily beat Djokovic on clay. He hasn't played Murray or Tursunov before, at least not on the ATP.

Rafa recently beat Fish on grass at Queen's. Which is irrelevant, given that Fish is out of Wimbly, too.

So your point is?

It's not like any of these guys, other than Federer, have done any great shakes at Wimbledon before. Some of them, who are still there, have an opp certainly, but their Wimbledon resume isn't any greater than Rafa's at the moment.

Edit: Rafa is 1-0 against Mirnyi, and that was on fast hardcourts on Dubai this year. Forgot about that.

PS: Maybe you need to check your Nadal trivia. ;-) Or at least keep pace with what is going on with Wimbly.

Jonas
07-01-2006, 03:40 PM
Nadal is certainly top 3-4 on every surface, like it or not.

LowProfile
07-01-2006, 03:50 PM
Okay, Nalby and Grosjean are out. Rafa has beaten Ancic on grass before (Wimbly 2004). He's beaten Grosjean a couple times. Have to check on Mirnyi, as I don't know that off the top of my head.

Berdych has beaten him on hardcourts, but he'll have to get by Federer before he has another chance at Nadal here.

Rafa handily beat Djokovic on clay. I don't think he's played Murray or Tursunov before, at least not on the ATP.

He recently beat Fish on grass at Queen's. Which is irrelevant, given that Fish is out of Wimbly, too.

So your point is?

It's not like any of these guys, other than Federer, have done any great shakes at Wimbledon before. Some of them, who are still there, have an opp certainly, but their Wimbledon resume isn't any greater than Rafa's at the moment.

Edit: Rafa is 1-0 against Mirnyi, and that was on fast hardcourts on Dubai this year. Forgot about that.

PS: Maybe you need to check your Nadal trivia. ;-) Or at least keep pace with who is in and who is out of Wimbly. That would be a start.

Oh in the current tournament? You're going to have to mention that next time rather than make a generic claim. I don't think Nadal can get past Hewitt, although it certainly won't be straight sets for Hewitt. Beating someone on clay is nothing like beating them on grass. Just ask Federer.

VamosRafa
07-01-2006, 03:53 PM
Oh in the current tournament? You're going to have to mention that next time rather than make a generic claim. I don't think Nadal can get past Hewitt, although it certainly won't be straight sets for Hewitt. Beating someone on clay is nothing like beating them on grass. Just ask Federer.

Well, given that Rafa took a set off Hewitt at Queen's, your prediction falls into the NSS (No S--- Sherlock) category. He would have a chance there.

But again, most of the guys you mentioned above don't have impressive grass resumes anyway. And not knowing that Rafa beat Ancic at Wimbly in 2004 shows that you aren't totally up on your grasscourt stuff.

shawn1122
07-01-2006, 04:32 PM
Ancic is playing so much better now. He's in the top ten.

jackson vile
07-01-2006, 05:09 PM
lets start a discussion about his "hang time" in every serve...
Even Mcenroe said "Even players are talking about Nadals serve time"(not a exact quote, somewhat like that)

Andres rdy stdy, and Nadal bounces the ball 5 more times..before his serve.


Oh BS what about Mirnyi, non-stop dribling of the ball, or even the last guy Roger played.

I don't want to hear it

dannyjjang
07-01-2006, 05:44 PM
yeah i'll go nuts if my opponent takes that long, seriously... this isnt baseball where it takes 20-40seconds for each pitch
TOTALLY AGREED
we should measure his time of "preparation" before his serve....he could've beat andre in 2hr, but cuse of his "preparation" prolongs another 30min...

VamosRafa
07-01-2006, 08:17 PM
Ancic is playing so much better now. He's in the top ten.

And so is Rafa, who is No. 2, with 15 more singles titles. ;-)

HollerOne5
07-01-2006, 09:11 PM
One, for the people who complain about Nadal's time in between points, even on the BBC feed today, the commentators, including Jimmy Connors laughed, and said thats just people's excuses for losing to an excellent player. Its not like his serve "hang time" affects how well he is hitting the ball in points and the way other people play points. Its just an adjustment people need to make, and it is actually smart to take your time. It means he is thinking about his next shots. I don't think he is anywhere near as annoying before serving as Mary Pierce was...

Two, for those who say he still sucks on grass because he beat an aging Andre Agassi, need to realize that Agassi himself said Nadal could go far, and Agassi isn't the type to just say that because he got his clocked cleaned by him. And, I guarantee Agassi knows a lot more about tennis than you (i.e. - dh003i)

Third - Just look at the results. Nadal has made it further at Wimbledon this year than Roddick, Nalbandian, Blake, Ljubicic, and the list goes on. So people need to seriously stop the bashing.

Lastly - its even been noted now that the grass is a bit worn and extremely dried out due to hot weather, the grass court is playing more and more and more like a hard court each day. This is helping Rafael as well. I definitely see a SF showdown with Hewitt, which could go either way, IMO.

Egalite
07-01-2006, 11:16 PM
Having watched Rafa beat the Brit journeyman Bogdanovic in R1, and then Agassi in R3, I would have to say that his improvement has been phenomenal.

In R1 he looked like a fish out of water, his movement was mediocre and his ground strokes lacked bite.

Against Agassi you could see he was going to win from the first game. His movement and retrieving were out of this world, and his serve and groundstrokes were awesome.

RiosTheGenius
07-01-2006, 11:23 PM
Yes, Nadal does suck on grass. Fine, he beat an at-the-end of his career Agassi. A healthy Agassi would have cleaned his clock.

Let's see how he fares against Roddick and some other high-calibre healthy grass-court players.
firstly , don't spit to the sky.... Nadal might get far in this tournament and shut you up.
secondly, Roddick is no calibre player anymore.
thirdly, I think andy Murray will end Nadal's run in a very highly contested match.

RiosTheGenius
07-01-2006, 11:25 PM
TOTALLY AGREED
we should measure his time of "preparation" before his serve....he could've beat andre in 2hr, but cuse of his "preparation" prolongs another 30min...
not as bad as Sharapova's preparation though

arnz
07-02-2006, 05:12 AM
Lets see how he fares against Roddick and some other high-calibre healthy grass-court players.


Roddick??? LMAO

Rataplan
07-02-2006, 05:29 AM
I loved the commentary on the BBC from Jimmy Connors and to a lesser degree from Pat Cash.

When talking about Rafa's tendency to take his time between points and players and umpires paying more attention to it, Connors said that Agassi likes a fast pace and many players like to rush Nadal but, Jimmy added, Nadal is now experienced enough and mentally tough enough to not be thrown off by that and not let him be rushed by Agassi and Connors added that he liked that about Nadal.

Later Cash wondered if Agassi would have a talk with Nadal about him taking time between points (and I thought that Nadal wasn't exaggerating at all here - he was much faster in getting ready on Agassi's serve but he did take a bit more time on his own serve, which is fair enough IMO) but Cash said that it would really sound like sour grapes if he would complain about it after being defeated (tell that to Ljubicic). Cash said that if a player would complain about the taking time after a defeat, he would really come across as a sore loser. "Complain about him taking time between points?...yeah mate, it wasn't his forehand and the backhand that did you in" (paraphrasing)

Talking about Nadal's bottle placement thing, Cash noticed how obsessive that looks but Connors said that he could emphatize with it and they started to talk a bit about various habits players have.

HollerOne5
07-02-2006, 10:52 AM
Yeah, it was great commentary. I think they referred to them as "idiosynchrocies" or however you spell that. They said Nadal has his thing with the bottle placement and Agassi had his when he needed the ballboys at all the exact places on the court.

BabolatFan
07-02-2006, 11:10 AM
Sucked what? I was thinking the same. Hehe.

dh003i
07-02-2006, 12:03 PM
HollerOne,

Yes, and Andre was being ******** then too. Didn't he have to have some ball-girl rub his sweaty back or something? That's just disgusting.

As for the commentary about time between points, from Connors of all people. Yea, Connors was a real gentleman on court. No, he was basically like McEnroe. So anything he says about sportsmanship is meaningless. Connors and McEnroe did a terrible thing to tennis by making it acceptable to behave like they did.

Here's the fact: Nadal cheats. There is an explicit rule on time between points, and Nadal violates it. Nadal does not receive serve at the server's reasonable pace. He's cheating -- simple as that. It doesn't affect the outcome of the match? A grinder taking extra time between points doesn't affect how well he plays and how well the other player plays? ********. It gives him time to recover from long rallies, where his opponents didn't have to run around so much; and it's gamesmanship against the other player.

The fact of the matter is, Nadal is cheating. This is something Federer and Sampras, for example, didn't do when they were late teenagers / early 20s.

Rataplan
07-02-2006, 12:11 PM
Here's the fact: Nadal cheats
:rolleyes:

Oh, stop being such a drama queen.
Rafael Nadal respected the given time but it was Agassi who made a big show if things by sitting on a chair because he had to wait for Nadal when Nadal was serving.
Where are your big principles then, eh? Doesn't Agassi have to respect Nadal's pace of serve?


grinder taking extra time between points doesn't affect how well he plays and how well the other player plays?
Please have some perspective and look at it from both sides.
A player trying to rush another player...that can affect the game as well.

If a player likes to rush another player, that's ok but if a player tries to slow down the game...OMG...CHEATER!!!
Is that it?

Connors and MacEnroe brought some personality into the sport. Maybe too much at times so they came up with stricter rules but now we're at the other end of the extreme: rules that are stifling personalities.

chess9
07-02-2006, 12:26 PM
What Rafa needs is a John McEnroe type opponent to say to him during a match as he's starting his long awaited serve:

"Hey, Rafa, you forgot to put your sombrero back on after your between point siesta." :)

Actually, I think JM wouldn't be so funny or kind....

-Robert

dh003i
07-02-2006, 12:46 PM
Rataplan,

Actually, I hadn't watched the Agassi-Nadal match yet. I'll have to d/l it.

If Agassi did that, shame on him. However, if Nadal was outside of the bounds of time by the rules, then Agassi has a point.

But anyways, I'm not talking about just this match against Agassi. I'm talking about what Nadal has been doing consistently, every single match. Now, if Nadal starts abiding by the rules, then that's good. However, his little rant about why he should be allowed to cheat is just poor sportsmanship. It deserves a Whine of the Week: "Nadal: Why don't they just let me cheat?"

Now, some people here have said that it's sour grapes for a losing player to point that out. But I'd argue not if it's true. I mean, really, if they point that out after they won, then it's nit-picking, since they won anyways.

According to this logic, it's never ok for a player to criticize another player for cheating. BS.

Rataplan
07-02-2006, 01:05 PM
. It deserves a Whine of the Week: "Nadal: Why don't they just let me cheat?"
You're exaggerating again IMO and I don't quite understand why you use the word "cheater" for this but let's not go there because I don't think that I'm going to convince you.
He got about 3 warnings in RG for it, right? I would like to see how many warnings players were given in RG but you guys are not making a big deal out most of these warnings because you guys (or some of you) are too busy making a big deal out of this and using strong words like 'cheater'.

I do wish that he didn't say this sort of thing in a press conference but he did and yes, there's a touch of whining in it because I don't think that the umpires were picking on him (but he didn't use those words, to be fair).
He does take his time and sometimes he oversteps the limits. He gets a warning for it and he should deal with that.
However, I do feel that he has a point that - because of what some players have said - they are scrutinizing him more closely than other players.
The warning before the Queens match was ridiculous.
The warning to Carlos Costa for shouting Vamos Rafa was ridiculous since the trainer of Nadal's opponent was also encouraging his player loudly but he did not get a warning.

He should deal with it behind the scenes but I think the same of Ivan "sour grapes" Ljubicic and Roger Federer.
Some have argued that perhaps they felt that a public statement was needed because the behind the scenes operation didn't work. Maybe Nadal feels the same way.

Now, some people here have said that it's sour grapes for a losing player to point that out. But I'd argue not if it's true. I mean, really, if they point that out after they won, then it's nit-picking, since they won anyways.

According to this logic, it's never ok for a player to criticize another player for cheating. BS.
Fair enough but that's because you've taken the viewpoint that he crosses the line regularly and you see it as OMG, CHEATING.
Whereas I see it as an occasional breach of the rules and he gets a warning for it - that's fair. He does try to cut back time so I think people shouldn't jump on this as an excuse to call him a cheater. Move on, people.

Hey, none of these players are perfect. Federer smashed a ball into the sea out of frustration - that's against those strict rules as well. They break those damn strict rules from time to time. Big deal. Federer got a warning for it and he moved on.
These players are not robots, they are human.

These tennis players are big boys.

HollerOne5
07-02-2006, 01:14 PM
I mean people are just trying to make excuses for someone who is co-dominating the sport, especially when it happens to be someone they don't care for.....Can't we just talk about the actual tennis being played, Nadal's great adjustments for the grass court, and yada yada yada, instead of complaining of Nadal's easy draw and "cheating" abilities.

Volly master
07-02-2006, 01:53 PM
Nadal is Average on grass, he isnt horriable other wise he wouldnt be a top player.

but imo, because of his easy draw, thats the reason he was able to get as far as he got, exactly like the Lubjicic draw in the french.
If he ran into Muller again, he would loose, Kendrick should have finsihed him off but he pulled a murray and his lack of fitness got the better of him.

Nadal got lucky, but a win is a win is a win. All Credit to him for hanging tough, but if he runs into a confident Hewitt, the chances of him winning are really slim, hate to say it. You can bring up that "OMG he won a set off him in queens", yeah, one set, thats not a match, and hewitt is living with soo much more confidence then he was then, so hes alot more dangerous then before

so if they do meet, i say Hewitt in 4, or 3 (but really close ones)

HollerOne5
07-02-2006, 02:22 PM
Nadal is Average on grass, he isnt horriable other wise he wouldnt be a top player.

but imo, because of his easy draw, thats the reason he was able to get as far as he got, exactly like the Lubjicic draw in the french.
If he ran into Muller again, he would loose, Kendrick should have finsihed him off but he pulled a murray and his lack of fitness got the better of him.

Nadal got lucky, but a win is a win is a win. All Credit to him for hanging tough, but if he runs into a confident Hewitt, the chances of him winning are really slim, hate to say it. You can bring up that "OMG he won a set off him in queens", yeah, one set, thats not a match, and hewitt is living with soo much more confidence then he was then, so hes alot more dangerous then before

so if they do meet, i say Hewitt in 4, or 3 (but really close ones)


Please, if HT Lee can take Hewitt to 5 sets on grass, I'm pretty sure Nadal has a good chance of winning.

Volly master
07-02-2006, 02:26 PM
Everyone has an off day, Lee played out of his mind and hewitt was horriable that day, he was off, but he regrouped the next day and won.

its part of life, then he rolled against rochus in the next round, omg, was that a fluke too?

VamosRafa
07-02-2006, 05:39 PM
Everyone has an off day, Lee played out of his mind and hewitt was horriable that day, he was off, but he regrouped the next day and won.

its part of life, then he rolled against rochus in the next round, omg, was that a fluke too?

Your post could be convereted to say this (deleting the reference to "the next day", as Rafa had to regroup all in the same day):

"Everyone has an off day, Kendrick played out of his mind and Nadal was horriable that day, he was off, but he regrouped and won.

its part of life, then he rolled against Agassi in the next round, omg, was that a fluke, too?"

To answer your question: It wasn't a fluke with respect to either player, IMO.

dannyjjang
07-02-2006, 11:11 PM
ah.. i always start a post but never go back...and always leads to different direction ?????!!!

jhhachamp
07-03-2006, 07:42 AM
ah.. i always start a post but never go back...and always leads to different direction ?????!!!

Maybe because you make stupid threads?

dannyjjang
07-03-2006, 11:10 AM
Maybe because you make stupid threads?
why thank you

dh003i
07-03-2006, 12:53 PM
VamosRafa,

If you actually watched the Nadal-Kendrick match, you'd know that wasn't what happened. Kendrick ran out of gas. He wasn't playing "out of his mind at the beginning". Sure, he was playing good, great maybe -- but not "out of his mind". All credit to Nadal for being in shape, and discredit to Kendrick for not being in shape, but it's hardly like Nadal beat Kendrick by playing exceptional grass-court tennis.

VamosRafa
07-03-2006, 01:08 PM
VamosRafa,

If you actually watched the Nadal-Kendrick match, you'd know that wasn't what happened. Kendrick ran out of gas. He wasn't playing "out of his mind at the beginning". Sure, he was playing good, great maybe -- but not "out of his mind". All credit to Nadal for being in shape, and discredit to Kendrick for not being in shape, but it's hardly like Nadal beat Kendrick by playing exceptional grass-court tennis.

I did watch the match, and I'm calling it like I saw it. And if Kendrick's fitness wasn't enough to go the distance, he has no business in a best-of-five tournament then. Give the spot to someone who is fit.

But it doesn't matter how Rafa beat him, does it?

I do agree that Rafa has played better in his past two matches.

Volly master
07-03-2006, 01:24 PM
he has no business in a best-of-five tournament then. Give the spot to someone who is fit.



wow, how about you go play some tournaments and see how good your fitness is then, apperently sounds like your just in the best shape like nadal.

The man rightfully Quilifed into the main draw by winning 3 matches fair and sqaure, i dont see you doing doing that. I think he earned that much, dont be upset that Rafa almost lost it at 4-4 in the 3rd because he made a really lucky volley at 30-all to avoid a break point.

Kendrick earned his place in the tournament rightfully and won an opening round and played rafa to the limit.

thats better then you'll ever do.

HollerOne5
07-03-2006, 01:30 PM
VamosRafa,

If you actually watched the Nadal-Kendrick match, you'd know that wasn't what happened. Kendrick ran out of gas. He wasn't playing "out of his mind at the beginning". Sure, he was playing good, great maybe -- but not "out of his mind". All credit to Nadal for being in shape, and discredit to Kendrick for not being in shape, but it's hardly like Nadal beat Kendrick by playing exceptional grass-court tennis.

Well you know nothing about tennis then if you think a player of Kendrick's caliber hitting second serves at 120 mph right on the line isn't playing "out of his mind." Of course he was playing out of his mind, and I guarantee he couldn't play like that again if he tried. But to his credit, he did play well, but I'm just saying he was seeing the ball like a football. He was hitting line after line, great volleys, and going for first serves on his second serves. You are an idiot if you think that he wasn't playing out of his mind.

dh003i
07-03-2006, 01:31 PM
Vamos,

My point is that outside of his upcoming opponent, Nadal is probably the worst grass-court player in the quarter finals. He had an easy draw. Federer, Baghdatis, Ancic, and Hewitt have been much more impressive. Come on, look at how Federer is dismantling really seasoned grass-court opponents. Much more impressive than Nadal straggling by 100+ players.

Sure, you don't blame Nadal for who he's played. But that does factor in to how impressive you consider his victories.

dh003i
07-03-2006, 01:36 PM
HollerOne,

yes, and even when he wasn't playing at that level, still a better grass-court player than Nadal. He lost because he ran out of gas. Simple as that.

dannyjjang
07-03-2006, 01:59 PM
HollerOne,

yes, and even when he wasn't playing at that level, still a better grass-court player than Nadal. He lost because he ran out of gas. Simple as that.
i know..gas is too expensive these days

guedoguedo
07-09-2006, 09:19 AM
OOps .

guedoguedo
07-09-2006, 09:21 AM
http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2006/writers/jon_wertheim/06/21/tennis.bag/tx_federer_ap.jpg

Janne
07-09-2006, 11:26 AM
Nadal by no means suck. He may not be the best, but that doesnt mean he sucks, which he doesnt. He is a young genius on clay.

tlm
07-09-2006, 11:59 AM
Nadal also showed how quick he learns,i thought he played very good considering it was on grass+fed played great.